Some people think that if a police force carries a gun, it can lead to a higher level of crime in the society. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It has been argued that carrying a gun by police forces may cause more serious crimes. However, I agree with the view that a police officer still should carry fire weapons to ensure their safety and that of individuals.

The job of protecting citizens by police officers is highly dangerous. Their life is threatened by criminals who carry knifes or even guns, so they need to be equipped with proper weapons to ensure that they can fight back when they are attacked by criminals. For example, to arrest criminals who have committed serious crimes such as robbery and murder, detectives need to copy with highly dangerous situations, and they may have to shoot the criminals down with a gun when it is necessary. Furthermore, equipped with a gun, police officers can deter crimes. Victims would not be offended by criminals if criminals know that they could be shot by a patrol when they are committing offences.

On the other hand, many people argue that if threatened by guns, criminals may be stimulated to buy more weapons to fight against police forces. Consequently, it may lead to an upgrade of conflicts in cities. However, even though police does not carry guns, criminals will still be equipped as many weapons as possible and threat individuals’ safety. Therefore, it is required for police to be equipped fire weapons to suppress crimes so that criminals would never dare to commit any offences.

To conclude, although criminals would purchase more weapons to fight against police forces, which may threaten individuals' safety, there are still more advantages for police officers to protect citizens with guns. As a result, it can deter crimes and reduce crime rate.